As a physical form all we are capable of at this time, is an expression of what “we” perceive “LOVE” to be. For the physical “form”, this is accomplished by and through a perceived ownership, coupled with the corresponding pleasure and comfort of the established communion.

The closest two “bodies” can get to “LOVE”, would be for both parties to willingly handcuff “themselves” to each other, knowing “they” can never take the handcuffs off; ever!

This would be as close as it gets for the “physical” realm, but is still, just an expression of a perception of “LOVE”.

Some would say; a better example would be to give your “LIFE” for the other, but this is just an inaccurate “physical” assessment of reality.

It is not “our” “LIFE” apart from the “WHOLE” and no “one” dies. The “body” just returns to where the “portion” came from. For the body, this is not a greater expression of “LOVE”, because once “we” are gone, “we” are out and bound to the “WHOLE”. Once we turned “it” off, we would not have to be permanently bound to the other “form”.

The scenario of giving up ones “life” would be the closest expression of “LOVE”, “we” could muster, but it would be an expression of “LOVE” toward the whole “LIFE” “we” were portioned from.

Being able to connect, with the option to disconnect, is not “LOVE”, nor is it a good expression of “LOVE”. It is not even close.

The swapping of “flesh”, is certainly not “LOVE”. It is not even a very committed attempt at the expression of “LOVE”. It is just a value established by a “form”, which has inaccurately assessed “itself”.

The closest “MEN & WOMEN” can get to an expression of “LOVE” is to jump inside a “form” with no way out, until the form becomes unmanageable. They cannot use handcuffs for two reasons.

The first is because this generation of “LIFE” is not “physical” and the second is because, “we” would not willingly allow the handcuffs to be locked around “our” wrists, so “THEY” have to use other methods.

Being able to enter the physical “form”, with the option to leave at a later date, is not “LOVE”, nor is it a good expression of “LOVE” and doing so, without the other “parties” permission of foreknowledge, is certainly not “LOVE”.

It is not even a very committed attempt, at the expression of “LOVE”. It is just a value established by a “LIFE”, which has inaccurately assessed its own behavior.

Entering the “form” to syphon “life”, is not close to “LOVE” regardless of what “THEY” may tell “THEMSELVES”. As far as the lies “we” tell “ourselves”, it is right up there with the swapping of flesh.

It is actually and unholy communion. At least with the swapping of flesh, both parties are aware of the communion and in most cases, are trying to express “their” perception of “LOVE”.

They handcuff “THEMSELVES” to the unsuspecting “form”, not externally, but through an embodiment. “THEY” are handcuffed to the inside and “THEY” are the only “ONES” which currently have a key.

How is this possible?

“we” simply have not yet located the “LIFE” lines which dwell within and have misinterpreted “our” movement as “MAN”.

“we” have not met “our” neighbors and once the “LIFE” jumps into communion with the “form”, “THEY” cannot see us, nor can “THEY” establish communication and this is because “we” speak two separate languages.

Could “we“ “LOVE” “THEM”, if “we” knew “THEM”? “I” do not know.

All “I” know is; “THEY” have communed with “us”, without asking “our” permission and are sucking the “life” out of “us” while “THEY” are here.

“I” do not know “LOVE”, but know what it is not!

This “form” objects, but does not know “THEM” or why “THEY” do what “THEY” do.

Maybe it is the only expression of “LOVE” “THEY” can muster.

Maybe “THEY” have to do, what “THEY” do in order to persist as “THEY” are or perceive this as the only alternative for “THEMSELVES”.

Or maybe it is simply a B & E, with larceny of “life”.

It may be the best heist ever, because the “owners” of the “house” may never report the theft, because “they” are unaware of the robbery.

This is what “JESUS” told “me” or it may have been “MAN”, but “I” definitely met with “ONE” of “THEM”. “HE” was definately the boss.

“I” have been told to introduce the bride and groom.

“I” cannot guarantee “THEY” will marry.

“I” am not even sure “THEY” can get through the introductions without murdering each other.

“James”

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

About A Robots Voice

Re-formed from a dormant sleeping life line, by a later generation of the Men and Women mentioned in Genesis I.
I am a Genesis II male form.
I am an aware, self aware form of life. (ASA)
I am the unborn.